Patents have been an accepted method of encouraging research and development. In the recent past "the scope of technologies that can be patented has been increased to include, among other things, gene sequences, computer programs and methods of doing business (Hunt and Bessen 2004)." Business Methods patents have witnessed very rapid growth since the 1998 State Street case (149 F.3d 1368, 1998) outcome which held that there is no patentable subject matter exception for method of doing business (Allison and Hunter 2006). In other words, business methods are now considered patentable subject matter. This paper examines, whether or not there has been a positive impact in innovation, in particular from the Banking industry, which prior to the State Street Bank case was more restricted from obtaining patents for internal banking process innovations. The hypothesis of this dissertation is that business methods would have results that are similar to the Bessen and Hunt (2007) software study which found that software patents were a substitute for R&D; and contradicted the popular belief of incentive theory. This empirical work in the area of business method patents is fundamental to understanding this new area of patenting.
展开▼
机译：专利已成为鼓励研发的公认方法。在最近的过去，“可以申请专利的技术范围已经扩大，其中包括基因序列，计算机程序和经商方法（Hunt and Bessen 2004）”。自从1998年道富案（149 F.3d 1368，1998）结案以来，专利方法的发展一直非常迅速（Allison和Hunter 2006），专利方法没有例外。换句话说，商业方法现在被视为可授予专利的主题。本文研究了创新是否产生了积极影响，特别是来自银行业的影响。在道富银行案之前，该行业受到更多限制，无法获得内部银行流程创新的专利。本文的假设是，商业方法的结果类似于Bessen和Hunt（2007）的软件研究，该研究发现软件专利可以替代研发；并与人们普遍认为的激励理论相矛盾。商业方法专利领域的这项经验性工作对于理解这一新的专利领域至关重要。
展开▼
